3 ms·

You might think so, he might even think so, but this is the real conflict: > Those fads are never very compatible with professional working life. Otherwise, w

You might think so, he might even think so, but this is the real conflict: > Those fads are never very compatible with professional working life. Otherwise, why would he even say that? He'd say, "my wife isn't convinced by the science" or, "my wife isn't interested in that" but he doesn't -- he says the 'fads' are incompatible with a professional working life (nb: breastfeeding & baby-wearing have been practiced since basically the beginning of humanity; calling them 'fads' is particularly uncharitable). His (his wife's) conflict is that socially-defined 'good mothering' (of the 2013 variety) is at odds with professional life, and he (his wife) feels understandably insufficient when she's getting blasted with messages like 'breast is best!'. So their defense is to fight against societal gender expectations which is exactly what the system wants you to do because while everyone is arguing about whether men can breastfeed, nobody is arguing about missing the formative years of their child's life because you can only buy a house with two incomes.

rayiner 13y ago
> (nb: breastfeeding & baby-wearing have been practiced since basically the beginning of humanity; calling them 'fads' is particularly uncharitable) Educated, upper-income Americans acting like they're prehistoric villagers is, in fact, the root of several different fads.
- Domenic_S 13y ago
  You're not wrong, generally, but sometimes the way we first did things really is the best way. Studies show breastfeeding & baby-wearing to be beneficial: -Breastfed individuals were more likely to be upwardly mobile (http://adc.bmj.com/content/early/2013/04/24/archdischild-2012-303199 http://adc.bmj.com/content/early/2013/04/24/archdischild-201...) -Breastfeeding improves brain development in infants (http://news.brown.edu/pressreleases/2013/06/breastfeeding http://news.brown.edu/pressreleases/2013/06/breastfeeding, journal article here: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811913005922 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811913...) -Increased Carrying Reduces Infant Crying (http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/77/5/641.abstract http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/77/5/641.abstr...) -Baby wearing & co-sleeping decreases crying & GORD (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15780481 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15780481) That is not to mention the psychological benefits of physical closeness which I assume you don't need cites for.
  - rayiner 13y ago
    Most of those studies suffer from a key flaw: they ignore maternal education/income. Since more educated women from higher-income families are more likely to breastfeed, you would expect breastfed children to score better in areas like brain development. The bottom-line for my wife and I in making the choice was: is there any improvement in IQ in the long-term? And the answer seems to be no: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-02/breast-feeding-is-not-how-mothers-make-kids-smart.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-02/breast-feeding-is-n... (study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1633819 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1633819).
    - Domenic_S 13y ago
      The first study I linked accounted for maternal IQ: > In an ordinal regression model, markers of neurological development (cognitive test scores) and stress (emotional stress scores) accounted for approximately 36% of the relationship between breast feeding and social mobility. The second looked at white matter and sub-cortical gray matter volume which you can either find significant or not significant. Your own article says: > Of course, breast-feeding is a healthy thing to do. It enhances the baby’s immune system, and builds a bond with mom which I consider positive things. But it also makes bizarre claims, like: > Working mothers, already strapped by the expenses of new parenthood, cannot necessarily afford to shell out hundreds of dollars for a breast pump and accessories. ...and how much does formula cost? Ultimately, you've got to just do what you think is best for your kid, and it sounds like you did. As your article says, there is no One True Way. But if having a career makes you compromise on what you think is best for your kid, that's a problem (with the construct of 'careers'), that's my point.
      - rayiner 13y ago
        > The first study I linked accounted for maternal IQ: > In an ordinal regression model, markers of neurological development (cognitive test scores) and stress (emotional stress scores) accounted for approximately 36% of the relationship between breast feeding and social mobility. That quote is referring to the baby's cognitive test scores, not the mother's. See also: http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2010/07/breastfeeding-and-iq-steer-et-al-2010.html http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2010/07/breastfeeding-and-iq-st.... Also: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10224215 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10224215 ("Significant relations between breastfeeding and Woodcock Reading Achievement scores at 11 years were also reduced to nonsignificant levels after the inclusion of maternal IQ and the Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment.")
jlgreco 13y ago
The incompatibilities between being a professional and raising a child that way (fad or otherwise) are practical problems. An office building is not the place to raise an infant. Not to be crude, but a well trained dog would be less intrusive and lower maintenance but most offices aren't big on even those. This becomes even more clear when you look at workplaces beyond professional office environments. Expecting factories to allow mothers to carry their infants around in slings throughout the workday is unreasonable. Those workplaces are not and cannot be designed with that in mind. No, I think I agree with rayiner. The real problem is that women are expected to raise their children in that peculiar way. We have infrastructure and social constructs that allow mothers to remain professionals but now society is telling mothers that if they want to be good mothers then they cannot take advantage of those things. "Good" mothers don't take advantage of modern convenience but instead do it the prehistoric way that is fundamentally at odds with maintaining a career. That is the problem.
- Domenic_S 13y ago
  No, the problem is that a career as we've defined it is required in the first place (desired is a different animal). Why can't a mother co-work with other mothers? Or consult while her partner watches the kid/s? Or choose to do only mothering? Or find some other way to combine career and motherhood in proportions that aren't 90/10? "Well, if she isn't in the office from 9-6 she won't get promoted, or she'll get caught in the next round of downsizing, or we can't collaborate as well", congratulations, you're now part of the problem. Some offices do reduce the friction with on-premise daycare, breastfeeding/pumping rooms, flexible schedules, work from home, etc. It's not an insurmountable problem. > society is telling mothers that if they want to be good mothers then they cannot take advantage of those things. Looking at US society I can't agree with that. Daycare is pervasive. Walking down the halls here I see many women, many of them with pictures of their young children in their cubes. Perhaps it's different here in SV, but I don't think so. What I do see is a lot of this kind of talk on the part of young professional mothers, and this makes me think it is a defense mechanism -- that the mothers actually would like to spend more time with their kids, maybe not breastfeed or maybe so, but in any case, the current proportion of career and motherhood is not fulfilling to them. [Since I mentioned the office, I will add the standard disclaimer that this opinion is my own and not that of my employer's. I don't talk about this stuff at work.]

rayiner 13y ago

> (nb: breastfeeding & baby-wearing have been practiced since basically the beginning of humanity; calling them 'fads' is particularly uncharitable) Educated, upper-income Americans acting like they're prehistoric villagers is, in fact, the root of several different fads.

Domenic_S 13y ago
You're not wrong, generally, but sometimes the way we first did things really is the best way. Studies show breastfeeding & baby-wearing to be beneficial: -Breastfed individuals were more likely to be upwardly mobile (http://adc.bmj.com/content/early/2013/04/24/archdischild-2012-303199 http://adc.bmj.com/content/early/2013/04/24/archdischild-201...) -Breastfeeding improves brain development in infants (http://news.brown.edu/pressreleases/2013/06/breastfeeding http://news.brown.edu/pressreleases/2013/06/breastfeeding, journal article here: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811913005922 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811913...) -Increased Carrying Reduces Infant Crying (http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/77/5/641.abstract http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/77/5/641.abstr...) -Baby wearing & co-sleeping decreases crying & GORD (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15780481 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15780481) That is not to mention the psychological benefits of physical closeness which I assume you don't need cites for.
- rayiner 13y ago
  Most of those studies suffer from a key flaw: they ignore maternal education/income. Since more educated women from higher-income families are more likely to breastfeed, you would expect breastfed children to score better in areas like brain development. The bottom-line for my wife and I in making the choice was: is there any improvement in IQ in the long-term? And the answer seems to be no: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-02/breast-feeding-is-not-how-mothers-make-kids-smart.html http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-02/breast-feeding-is-n... (study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1633819 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1633819).
  - Domenic_S 13y ago
    The first study I linked accounted for maternal IQ: > In an ordinal regression model, markers of neurological development (cognitive test scores) and stress (emotional stress scores) accounted for approximately 36% of the relationship between breast feeding and social mobility. The second looked at white matter and sub-cortical gray matter volume which you can either find significant or not significant. Your own article says: > Of course, breast-feeding is a healthy thing to do. It enhances the baby’s immune system, and builds a bond with mom which I consider positive things. But it also makes bizarre claims, like: > Working mothers, already strapped by the expenses of new parenthood, cannot necessarily afford to shell out hundreds of dollars for a breast pump and accessories. ...and how much does formula cost? Ultimately, you've got to just do what you think is best for your kid, and it sounds like you did. As your article says, there is no One True Way. But if having a career makes you compromise on what you think is best for your kid, that's a problem (with the construct of 'careers'), that's my point.
    - rayiner 13y ago
      > The first study I linked accounted for maternal IQ: > In an ordinal regression model, markers of neurological development (cognitive test scores) and stress (emotional stress scores) accounted for approximately 36% of the relationship between breast feeding and social mobility. That quote is referring to the baby's cognitive test scores, not the mother's. See also: http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2010/07/breastfeeding-and-iq-steer-et-al-2010.html http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2010/07/breastfeeding-and-iq-st.... Also: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10224215 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10224215 ("Significant relations between breastfeeding and Woodcock Reading Achievement scores at 11 years were also reduced to nonsignificant levels after the inclusion of maternal IQ and the Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment.")

jlgreco 13y ago

The incompatibilities between being a professional and raising a child that way (fad or otherwise) are practical problems. An office building is not the place to raise an infant. Not to be crude, but a well trained dog would be less intrusive and lower maintenance but most offices aren't big on even those. This becomes even more clear when you look at workplaces beyond professional office environments. Expecting factories to allow mothers to carry their infants around in slings throughout the workday is unreasonable. Those workplaces are not and cannot be designed with that in mind. No, I think I agree with rayiner. The real problem is that women are expected to raise their children in that peculiar way. We have infrastructure and social constructs that allow mothers to remain professionals but now society is telling mothers that if they want to be good mothers then they cannot take advantage of those things. "Good" mothers don't take advantage of modern convenience but instead do it the prehistoric way that is fundamentally at odds with maintaining a career. That is the problem.

Domenic_S 13y ago
No, the problem is that a career as we've defined it is required in the first place (desired is a different animal). Why can't a mother co-work with other mothers? Or consult while her partner watches the kid/s? Or choose to do only mothering? Or find some other way to combine career and motherhood in proportions that aren't 90/10? "Well, if she isn't in the office from 9-6 she won't get promoted, or she'll get caught in the next round of downsizing, or we can't collaborate as well", congratulations, you're now part of the problem. Some offices do reduce the friction with on-premise daycare, breastfeeding/pumping rooms, flexible schedules, work from home, etc. It's not an insurmountable problem. > society is telling mothers that if they want to be good mothers then they cannot take advantage of those things. Looking at US society I can't agree with that. Daycare is pervasive. Walking down the halls here I see many women, many of them with pictures of their young children in their cubes. Perhaps it's different here in SV, but I don't think so. What I do see is a lot of this kind of talk on the part of young professional mothers, and this makes me think it is a defense mechanism -- that the mothers actually would like to spend more time with their kids, maybe not breastfeed or maybe so, but in any case, the current proportion of career and motherhood is not fulfilling to them. [Since I mentioned the office, I will add the standard disclaimer that this opinion is my own and not that of my employer's. I don't talk about this stuff at work.]